Monday, September 26, 2011

kate winslet wallpapers

images Kate Winslet Wallpapers

kate winslet wallpapers. Kate Winslet; Kate Winslet. Hellhammer

starscream

06-13 03:48 PM

MSNBC has opned up a message board for Employment Based (EB) Skilled Immigration Applicants http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/board.aspx?BoardID=1042 Go to the topic Employment Based (EB) Skilled Immigration Applicants

PLease post your messages on the board about EB backlog, H1B and CIR issues. Only 5 messages have been posted

I tend to sterr away from nurbs and use polygons exclusively...most 3d packages now (max, maya, xsi, lightwave, etc.) have really improved upon polygonal modeling, having added features such as subdivision surfaces (or sub'd's). This is great for any type of model, whether it be architectural or organic. Some people argue that Sub D's have rendered nurbs obsolete (no pun intended). I personally use XSI, but this is a new standard modeling method that can be applied to almost any program. Google the term, and see if there are any good tuts out there for your program.

In a nutshell, Sub D's allow you to work on a low density object, while in real-time, a virtual high resolution copy of that object is updated. The beauty of this lies in the ability to create organic nurbslike objects) with very little work, with even more accurate results than what can be achieved with nurbs. On the flipside, almost all architectural/structural modeling should be built with polys in the first place. I hope that helps, and if you need any more pointers about Sub D's, let me know.

Somebody with Nov05 PD tried to renew EAD and was given a 3 month EAD.......

Use of "01" instead of "10" has been common mistake by USCIS. I came across couple of such cases. This is typo error and they will fix it.

hair Kate-Winslet-Wallpaper (52)

Tags: kate winslet wallpaper

amsgc

07-02 09:36 PM

Regarding your argument on fairness:

On the contrary, under the current system immigrants from all nations do not have an equal opportunity to apply for a green card. Immigrants from the retrogressed countries are at an unfair disadvantage.

It is easy to see: A guy from ROW and a guy from India both are equally qualified engineers who have a EB2 PD of Jan 2008. The guy from ROW can apply to adjust status now, but the guy from India cannot apply until five years from now. That doesn't tell me that both immigrants have an equal opportunity.

Both immigrants would have had an equal opportunity if both could apply for GC at the same time. Once you have entered the country, have been gainfully employed, and your immigrant petition has been approved, how does it matter whether you came from India, china or Timbuktu? Your employer needs you for your skills, not your place of birth. Do you resolve your day to day office problems with your birth certificate pasted to your forehead?

Regarding your argument on diversity:

You need to understand that the country cap (set up 50 years ago) was NOT set up to give all countries an equal shot at sending EB immigrants to the US. The cap was based and an already existing xenophobic tendency (formally expressed way back in 1924) and the desire to retain the cultural and racial character of the US of '65. They would do fine with only handful of you if you didn't eat, drink, talk, walk and look like them.

Now, you need to understand another important point - The world has changed by leaps and bounds in the last fifty years, all made possible by advances in technology and a conscientious effort by governments to educate their people. As a result there are highly skilled people all over the world, who bring their own unique character and experience to the work place. And things have changed dramatically in the US too. Among other things, the US has become more accommodating to people of different cultural identities. Economically, the US is in need of more high skilled people than ever before. This is an irreversible trend, where the US of today is more interested in who you are and what you bring to the table than what you look like. If a few thousand Indians or Chinese are given the green card, based on their SKLLS, it will not alter the racial and cultural character of 300000000 Americans (that's 300 followed by six zeros). Rather it will only make it richer.

Usually politicians work in reactionary mode – they will espouse an idea once it is obvious that they can’t do without it. The fact that discussion to remove country caps in EB has come up in the congress means that the American people have already written it off as an absurd idea.

The agenda of this organization is pretty darn obvious if you care to go through the home page. The idea is to get as close as possible to a system of immigration that appropriately addresses the needs of the US economy and is fair to both Peter and Paul. A system which gives out a green card in a timely fashion, based on skills, job requirements, and the time when the process was started. We need to advocate a change because the current system says to Paul "screw you" and rewards Peter.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - I don't see how the per country limit is unfair! It was set up so that immigrants from ALL nations would have EQUAL opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. and to prevent any one (or two) countries from monopolizing the visa numbers. Getting rid of the per country limit would most certainly lead to immigration from a limited number of sources (countries) and thus jeopardize the diversity of the immigration process. Getting rid of it would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul because those countries who are severely retrogressed now would only see limited benefits and those who are not all that retrogressed would fall backwards - is that fair!? It seems these forms are dominated by "certain" groups who have their own agenda and don't really care about ROW! It makes me feel uncomfortable being an IV member from ROW!

Unless you have clearly written promise that they will apply for GC, you cannot fight in court. Secondly, even if they did give you in writing, there is no time limit on when they can file.....they can effectively file labor a month before 6th year of H1 and have you out of status and therefore layed off.

In that case, employers should mention the following in the offer letter

" In case, in future, if economy goes bad and recession occurs,we cannot sponsor your green card since it is easy to find american citizens who has minimum qualification."

This should be mentioned on the offer letters given by big comapnies.Then it is up to H1B candidate whenter to take the offer(risk) or not. Can these companies do this????

hot kate winslet wallpapers. Kate Winslet (Wallpaper 4)

Kate-Winslet-Wallpaper (94)

k3GC

11-10 10:06 PM

IV has people on the national advisory board that include the previous USCIS ombudsman, what is their take on this? I have not seen any thoughts from such experts that support this organization on this issue of quarterly spillover

Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are

1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.

2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.

3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.

The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.

The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.

That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.

Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.

Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.

 If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�

 Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.

There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.

For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.

Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.

There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.

My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.

Hi Guys I'm pretty new in all this and i've been following this discussion and perhaps someone can help me.... here is the question.... Do I have a visa number available ?? If so why am I waiting that long??

here is my story: i'm EB3 world - got my labor pd is 05/2002, and I concurrent filled I-485/I-140 on 05/2003.... already made 2 fingerprints..... I-140 was approved on 12/2005 (TSC).... i renew my EAD every year since I filled.

if what you guys are saying is correct that in order to accept the I-485 to be filled USCIS need to have a visa number available to the applicant.... y am I still waiting?? :confused:

thanks for the help and i'm sorry in advance for my lack of knowledge :)

dresses Kate-Winslet-Wallpaper (94)

Kate Winslet HD wallpapers

karrtthi

12-12 04:22 AM

Dear All,

I have applied for L1 B extension and the Status is Pending Petition Filing with my Company. My visa Expires by Dec 14th 2009 and i have to travel back to India by Dec 18th 2009 immediately due to personal emergency.

I dont have any acknowledgement till date for the extension as it is under process.

Following are my question 1) Will i have any issues when i return to india after 4 days of my visa expiration?Will it anyway affect my future visa petitions? 2) If the extension is filed, Is there any chances for the extension getting approved even if am not here unless there is no RFE.